WHY IS AUTOIT'S SIZE IS BIG??

[UEZ]

I'm using these settings to get smallest exe size:

#AutoIt3Wrapper_Run_Obfuscator=y
#Obfuscator_Parameters=/sf /sv /om /cs=0 /cn=0
#AutoIt3Wrapper_UseUpx=n
#AutoIt3Wrapper_Run_After=upx.exe --ultra-brute "%out%"
...

upx.exe --ultra-brute is very slow but it creates smallest exe files with UPX.

BR,

UEZ

Edited May 24, 2010 by UEZ

[Shafayat]

Doesn't the ultra brute option slow down the loading of exe on runtime?

[jvanegmond]

Doesn't the ultra brute option slow down the loading of exe on runtime?

Yes, UPX needs to pack when compiling and then unpack at runtime of course. It's obvious that when you use a slower compression at compile time, there will also be a slower decompression at run time.

[trancexx]

Few milliseconds lost because of that is irrelevant since this is AutoIt.

If packing then pack the best or don't pack at all.

Compressing exes make sense. Compressing dlls (made for public use) makes very little sense. The best, or just one, example of this stupidity is bass.dll.

[Shafayat]

If packing then pack the best or don't pack at all.

- Thanks. That was illuminating.

[GEOSoft]

@Jos

Before I go there, doesn't /sf simply sort the functions?

If that's all it's doing then it still isn't the answer. I need to get only the required functions from the UDFs and add those to the bottom of the script (sorted or not) but I need it done to the script not just to the compiled file (hence compile time directives are no good here). I remember years ago someone wrote a script to do exactly that but I can't find it anymore, even though it will probably need some serious updating by now.

[Jos]

@Jos

Before I go there, doesn't /sf simply sort the functions?

If that's all it's doing then it still isn't the answer. I need to get only the required functions from the UDFs and add those to the bottom of the script (sorted or not) but I need it done to the script not just to the compiled file (hence compile time directives are no good here). I remember years ago someone wrote a script to do exactly that but I can't find it anymore, even though it will probably need some serious updating by now.

Running Tidy with /SF will indeed "only" sort all Func's in alphabetic order and move to the bottom of the script source, but I said you needed to run Obfuscator first with /SOI to strip all unused Funcs and Global variables from all included files and after run Tidy on the Obfuscator generated file.

Jos

[GEOSoft]

Running Tidy with /SF will indeed "only" sort all Func's in alphabetic order and move to the bottom of the script source, but I said you needed to run Obfuscator first with /SOI to strip all unused Funcs and Global variables from all included files and after run Tidy on the Obfuscator generated file.

Jos

Thanks Jos.

Is this correct?

$sObf = "C:\Program Files\AutoIt3\SciTE\Obfuscator\Obfuscator.exe"
ShellExecute($sObf, "/SOI")

[Jos]

Thanks Jos.

Is this correct?

$sObf = "C:\Program Files\AutoIt3\SciTE\Obfuscator\Obfuscator.exe"
ShellExecute($sObf, "/SOI")

This should be close to run both steps in by one script creating a new output script:

$ScriptSource = "Test.au3"
$ScriptStrippedSource = "Test_Stripped.au3"  ; Don't make this the same name as input!!!!!
;
$sObf = @ProgramFilesDir & "\AutoIt3\SciTE\Obfuscator\Obfuscator.exe"
ShellExecuteWait($sObf, '"' & $ScriptSource & '" /SOI')
;Copy Stripped source to target
FileCopy(StringTrimRight($ScriptSource, 4) & "_Obfuscated.au3",$ScriptStrippedSource,1)
;Run Tidy on stripped target
$sObf = @ProgramFilesDir & "\AutoIt3\SciTE\tidy\tidy.exe"
ShellExecuteWait($sObf, '"' & $ScriptStrippedSource & '" /SF')
Exit

Jos

Edited May 22, 2010 by Jos
Fixed Script name in source

[GEOSoft]

This should be close to run both steps in by one script creating a new output script:

$ScriptSource = "Test.au3"
$ScriptStrippedSource = "Test_Stripped.au3"  ; Don't make this the same name as input!!!!!
;
$sObf = @ProgramFilesDir & "\AutoIt3\SciTE\Obfuscator\Obfuscator.exe"
ShellExecuteWait($sObf, '"' & @ScriptFullPath & '" /SOI')
;Copy Stripped source to target
FileCopy(StringTrimRight($ScriptSource, 4) & "_Obfuscated.au3",$ScriptStrippedSource,1)
;Run Tidy on stripped target
$sObf = @ProgramFilesDir & "\AutoIt3\SciTE\tidy\tidy.exe"
ShellExecuteWait($sObf, '"' & $ScriptStrippedSource & '" /SF')
Exit

Jos

Thank you.

With just a bit of minor cleanup and the use of another script I have, I finally achieved the desired result. All of my Global Constants are at the top of my script and all of the used functions at the bottom and all is now well with the world again.

[bo8ster]

It baffles me why people complain about of one of the most important feature of AutoIt. So the size may be construed as large even for ‘small’ scripts some people have not idea about the big picture. I am not bagging anyone but you have to understand AutoIt has applications far outside simple scripting.

Trade off for larger than expected scrips is execution of an exe with no pre-installation requirements. The statement “Having each compiled script capable of acting as a full-interpreter is a very powerful feature” is a gross understatement. (Statement taken from AutoItNotOnToDoList)

When professionals’ work within customer / customer simulated environments or embedded environments the requirement for clean systems or known-good-states is paramount. If the environment is compromised then so is testing.

I have created an embedded OS (like XP but with 1/3 of the OS removed) specifically created for custom hardware and was able to run automated system tests! I have also run automated system tests in virtual PCs and on production systems – pre-release because an AutoIt exe is self contained.

Looking at other tools like QTP, which are really data driven capture/replay, look at the cost and installation requirements – AutoIt is unmatched!

I do plead this feature remains!

[KaFu]

Compressing dlls (made for public use) makes very little sense.

This one caught my eye... so, when does the decompression of a dll take place? This shouldn't be a problem if I open the dll at the beginning of the script, loop through the calls and then close it at the end... or am I assuming this wrong?

[Mobius]

This one caught my eye... so, when does the decompression of a dll take place? This shouldn't be a problem if I open the dll at the beginning of the script, loop through the calls and then close it at the end... or am I assuming this wrong?

The unpacking loop is invoked when the dll is attached to the process, so if you are using dllopen (which you are) this only happens once, However using dllcall with a filename instead of a handle on a packed library means the unpacking process happens every time the function is called because the lib is attached and detached every time.

sorry for stating the obvious KaFu, I am pretty sure yours was a rhetorical question really.

Vlad

Edited May 28, 2010 by Mobius

[KaFu]

sorry for stating the obvious KaFu, I am pretty sure yours was a rhetorical question really.

Not really , but exactly as I assumed... but that's the way with assumptions , better have it confirmed, thanks .

[Melba23]

Mobius,

And I was happy to learn something! Thanks Vlad.

M23

[trancexx]

...because the lib is attached and detached every time.

This is not true.

Reference count is important.

[Richard Robertson]

This is not true.

Reference count is important.

Reference count is only used when more than one process opens a dll. If it closes it, then the reference count goes back down.

If it was used like DllCall("mydll.dll", ...) then it will be opened, called, and closed. Reference = 1, reference = 0.

[trancexx]

Reference count is only used when more than one process opens a dll. If it closes it, then the reference count goes back down.

If it was used like DllCall("mydll.dll", ...) then it will be opened, called, and closed. Reference = 1, reference = 0.

What if I do:

DllOpen("mydll.dll")

DllCall("mydll.dll", ...)

?

[Richard Robertson]

What if I do:

DllOpen("mydll.dll")

DllCall("mydll.dll", ...)

?

Then you'd make me change my opinion of you as one of the better coders on this forum.

[trancexx]

Then you'd make me change my opinion of you as one of the better coders on this forum.

And reference count thing?